The present invention provides interoperability for routing between a first telecommunication system that primarily uses a single protocol throughout and a second system that uses different protocols between its servers and between its servers and its devices. Such a first system is exemplified by an Internet Protocol Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) according to the third generation partnership project (3GPP) while such a second system is exemplified by a Wireless Village (WV) system, per the Mobile Instant Messaging and Presence Services (IMPS) Initiative formed in April 2001 to define and promote a set of universal specifications for mobile instant messaging and presence services. Therefore, an exemplary but non-limiting application of the present invention enables WV clients to interoperate with IMS clients.
FIG. 1 shows a WV system 12 including a WV server 12b and a WV client 12a. According to the WV “System Architecture Model version 1.1,” a WV system is a client-server based system where the server is an IMPS (Instant Messaging and Presence) server and the clients can be either mobile terminals or other services or applications for fixed PC clients. The WV server 12b and WV client 12a communicate according to either client-server protocol (CSP) or command line protocol (CLP). For interoperability, the WV servers (and gateways) from different domains are connected by a server-to-server protocol (SSP) defined in various WV specifications now published at version 1.1, which may be found at www.wirelessvillage.com. If a WV server receives a message addressed to a user within the same domain as the WV server, the WV will send the message to the user using CSP or CLP instead of SSP.
Also shown in FIG. 1 is an IMS 11 including an IMS server 11b and an IMS client 11a. As mentioned above, the IMS entities 11a 11b communicate using a single protocol (i.e. SIP) that is standardized by the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force).
Because of the use of different protocols by WV systems and IMS systems, providing communication between clients of the two different systems is problematic. To compound the problem, there may be some operators who deploy the IMS but not the WV, and other operators who deploy the WV but not the IMS but nonetheless wish to offer their customers access to the other service.
Co-owned U.S. application Ser. No. 10/265,650 filed on Oct. 3, 2002, and entitled WV-IMS RELAY AND INTEROPERABILITY METHODS adds mapping functionality (i.e. protocol translation services) to an Application Server (AS) of a 3GPP IMS (or to an IMS/WV gateway either coupled to the AS so as to be part of the AS or existing as a standalone server), mapping functionality that provides for translating addresses between a WV server of a WV system and the AS to permit interoperability between WV clients and IMS clients and so to allow, optionally, for instant messaging and presence services for operators who have deployed both IMS and WV or only one of the WV and IMS systems. The AS coupled with the IMS/WV gateway (or the IMS/WV gateway as standalone server), thus serves as an IMS/WV relay. Due to the possibility that an operator may have deployed WV but not IMS and due to the use of a CSP between WV clients and WV servers and the use of SSP between WV servers, the mapping functionality is structured to permit an IMS client device to register for a session with a WV system via the IMS/WV relay performing an SIP/CSP or SIP/CLP conversion so as to emulate a WV device login but to then use the SSP to maintain the session or to deliver a message or presence information. Likewise, the functionality enables a WV device to register directly into IMS for operators not deploying WV using the IMS/WV relay.
What is still needed is a specific procedure for translating a SIP address within any message from an IMS client into a message according to a protocol understood by a WV client.